I am much opposed to Boston having them - though it's not my money, so I suppose I shouldn't care if they waste it.
I am interested in opposing arguments. The ones I'm hearing aren't very good, but I've been hanging around bad neighborhoods, so those shouldn't count.
7 comments:
I don't have an opposing argument. I think the summer Olympics should be held in Greece. That's a prejudice, though I can come up with some arguments in favor of it. (Historical significance, keep costs manageable/predictable, efficient reuse of infrastructure, pump a little reliable money into what's otherwise a basket case. Of course they'd probably blow it in corruption, and they have this little penchant for civil unrest/war)
The olympics are just silly now. No longer "dedicated amateurs." It's all business. Even the "amateurs." (sponsored by xyz corp; manage to practice 20 hours a day without a job...) Plus, when they had the 'lympics here in Georgia, they were spread all over the state so a number of cities could all lose a bunch of money. And the olympic committee commissars wanted to sue anyone who had the audacity to use the term Olympic in their business or activity. Oversized, overpriced, overbloated. Time for them to go away.
I deleted my comment, as it commented on a comment that had been deleted or wasn't here, so maybe I got it in the wrong place.
I don't much watch the Olympics. I'd watch Fencing, but trying to find it is nigh on impossible.
Cities always think snagging the Olympics will be a good thing. Is it ever?
Seems like there ought to be readers from Colorado Springs, Atlanta, L.A., or who were there then, who could give us their opinions/impressions.
Grim's Hall (GA) has weighed in over at his site to my question.
Post a Comment